Arkansas Tech University Arkansas Tech University

Online Research Commons @ ATU Online Research Commons @ ATU

Theses from 2016 Student Research and Publications

Fall 12-1-2016

Strindberg's Miss Julie: An Exploitation of Genderlect and Strindberg's Miss Julie: An Exploitation of Genderlect and

Liberatory Pedagogy Liberatory Pedagogy

Jenava Moreau Harris Arkansas Tech University

Follow this and additional works at: https://orc.library.atu.edu/etds_2016

Part of the Comparative Literature Commons, English Language and Literature Commons, and the

Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Harris, Jenava Moreau, "Strindberg's Miss Julie: An Exploitation of Genderlect and Liberatory Pedagogy" (2016). Theses from 2016. 3. https://orc.library.atu.edu/etds_2016/3

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research and Publications at Online Research Commons @ ATU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses from 2016 by an authorized administrator of Online Research Commons @ ATU. For more information, please contact cpark@atu.edu.

STRINDBERG’S MISS JULIE: AN EXPLOITATION OF

GENDERLECT AND LIBERATORY PEDAGOGY

By

JENAVA HARRIS

Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of

Arkansas Tech University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

MASTER OF LIBERAL ARTS IN FINE ARTS

December 2016

ii

Permission

Title: Strindberg’s Miss Julie: An Exploitation of Genderlect and Liberatory Pedagogy

Program: Fine Arts

Degree: Master of Liberal Arts

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment for a graduate degree from Arkansas Tech

University, I agree the library of this university shall make it freely available for

inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying for scholarly purposes

may be granted to my thesis director, or, in that professor’s absence, by the Head of the

Department or the Dean of the Graduate College. To the extent that the usage of the

thesis is under control of Arkansas Tech University, it is understood that due recognition

shall be given to me and to Arkansas Tech University in any scholarly use which may be

made of any material in my thesis.

Signature

Date

iii

© 2016 Jenava Harris

iv

Abstract

Navigating the complexities of naturalist dramatic literature proves to be a challenge

under the best circumstances. How do we attempt to highlight the major themes and

tenants of Naturalism through an educational theatre lens? What happens when the show

is then double cast due to indecisiveness? How do we handle actors with personal trauma

influencing their ability to work with vulnerability and physical contact? These questions

and others were answered throughout this master’s thesis production of Miss Julie by

August Strindberg. Through a process guided by social research and dramaturgical

attention to detail, this director was able to explore a variety of different tools to reach

actors and help them explore the vulnerabilities of their characters. This paper will also

discuss the challenges of employing “liberatory pedagogy,” as detailed by Jonathan Cole,

to the process of working with designers. This process allowed for an open opportunity to

both collaborate with designers on their work, while also stepping back to allow their

creative desires flourish. Our experience however, eventually challenged the tenants of

teacher / student veracity.

v

Table of Contents

Page

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iv

STRINDBERG’S MISS JULIE: AN EXPLOITATION OF GENDERLECT AND

LIBERATORY PEDAGOGY .............................................................................................1

WORKS CITED ..................................................................................................................9

APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................10

Appendix A. Production Photos ............................................................................10

Appendix B. Director’s Analysis ...........................................................................12

Appendix C. Director’s Program Notes .................................................................29

Appendix D. KC/ACTF Respondent Notes ...........................................................32

Appendix E. Student Response Papers ..................................................................34

Appendix F. “Genderlect as Character Study: Gender Communication Theory and

Miss Julie” .............................................................................................................47

1

Strindberg’s Miss Julie: An Exploitation of Genderlect and Liberatory Pedagogy

Theatre as an art is a constantly evolving, fluid format that offers audiences and

professionals the ability to put life and the human experience under a microscope. We

can dissect the good, ugly, and apathetic traits that make human beings and human

interactions flourish. Naturalist ideology relies on one overarching principle: Scientific

reasoning and forces guide the natural world. Supernatural ideologies are not considered

since the main governing body of the world is benefitted by an examination of the

scientific forces at play. The dramatic vein of the Naturalist movement saw many deep

and provocative works during its time. Throughout the naturalist movement many works

were composed that sought to build upon the ideas of Realism in the works of Ibsen and

Chekov. August Strindberg is arguably one of the foremost studies in naturalist literature.

His play Miss Julie most specifically sought to explore the contrast of idealization and

degradation of people and ideologies. The characters within all offer a wealth of

complexity that is often subjective in its interpretation. When approaching Miss Julie for

performance, there were so many opportunities to be explored in how we work with

young actors to identify with the complex violence within the show. The use of

sociological and psychological theories has been employed in character exploration for

many years. Through Miss Julie, there is an opportunity that has not been tapped when

approaching character analysis of Jean, Julie, and Christine. Gender Communication

Theory offers an intensive addition to a character analysis workbook. Through this lens

of analysis and discovery on these characters, actors can intensify their ability to work

and identify on a new level of intricacy. Through the exploration and implementation of

gendered communication studies, we can supplement the techniques of reputable acting

2

theorists to create the world of Miss Julie as one enriched with specificity and truth for

our actors.

Miss Julie is a work that has followed me throughout my career as a theatre

professional. I was introduced to the battles of this story as an undergraduate, and

Strindberg’s masterpiece has stayed with me as a testament to the power that

psychological torment can inflict upon another human being. When I began to approach

what play I would like to explore and direct for my master’s thesis project, I immediately

thought of this work. For so long, I have been an artist driven by the need to explore

major themes that are relevant to our society in its current state. The use of theatre as a

medium to show how we as humans can discover prejudices about ourselves that we were

not aware of broadens the possibilities for self-reflection. This reflection can often take us

to a place that changes how we see and respond to the world around us. That magic and

power in the theatre, and the responsibility I have as the artist delivering that message,

truly empowers not only myself, but all of the students I have the opportunity to teach.

Through their dedication and work on this script, we have all learned valuable lessons

from each other, not only on our process, but also about how we respond to the world

around us. As an educator and student throughout this process, an experimental and

structured pedagogical approach to artistry was taken to ensure total fulfillment of

director, designer, and actor artistic intent.

The play began as an exercise in determining what directing styles I could piece

together to form my own version of the perfect process. Like perfection in any other

discipline, I quickly learned how impossible it would be to reach a point where I felt I

had done everything I could to bring this story to life. My personal goals for this project

3

were fulfilled through the tireless dedication of my collaborators. My colleagues and

students both taught me endless things daily that allowed me to refine my process as not

only a director, but as an educator as well.

The beginning of this process was a mixture of play analysis and exploration

paired with an intense focus into Gender Communication Theory. That focus on Gender

Communication Theory was a topic explored in another graduate class, and the study

provided a way to bring this material to the students in a way that allowed them to

interact with the language on another level. The challenges of Strindberg’s dialogue, and

of making undergraduate actors of varying experience levels understand the material,

made any little shortcut or different lens indispensable. As an undergraduate student, I

was taught two different directing styles that featured a micro managed approach to the

material and a macro focused approach that encouraged organic movement and

discovery. While both processes make the narrative a complete picture, they both also

encourage different levels of actor involvement in the creative development of the

characters and play. While researching different directing techniques and practices, I

came across an article titled “Liberatory Pedagogy and Activated Directing:

Restructuring the College Rehearsal Room” by Jonathan Cole. In this article, Cole details

the overwhelming lack of formal study into directing theory and practice, but most

especially in an educational setting. Cole states,

“In the director’s work with both actors and designers, group interaction and

dynamics play a major role. In the initial meeting with both of these groups, the

director must identify and communicate the importance of each individual’s

4

contribution to the group. All the artists involved must look to one another as

resources” (Cole 199-200).

Upon entering this experience, collaboration was of the utmost importance for personal

development. The problems came when this collaborative attempt began to involve

allowing the designers to stand by their decisions even if they did not adhere to some

fundamental knowledge’s of the show, such as given circumstances.

As an educator, student, director, technical director, and scenic designer in this

endeavor, I desired to work as a team with my students, and wanted to allow them to

stand by their successes and failures with the full knowledge that they made those design

decisions themselves. I made the executive decision to let my students have creative

license, and the consequence was pointed out by a colleague and mentor in the theatre

department. The line became too blurred to determine where director ineffectiveness met

student ineptitude.

This production was entered into the Kennedy Center American College Theatre

Festival, and was watched by professionals in both design and performance fields for

critical response. An addendum follows this report with a catalogue of the notes from

both respondents. While watching the live production of the show, all the little details in

all of the design elements became apparent. The aesthetic distance achieved by stepping

out of the active director role in rehearsals and back into a sharp design eye highlighted

the ineffectiveness of not guiding the designers more effusively through the process.

When differences in opinion were offered, it was the educational director’s duty to draw

the line between what was stylistically appropriate and what was not. Cole further states,

5

“It is important to note that the director does not surrender his or her own opinion

of the play in favor of the actors or designer’s visions of it; rather, through

constant critical dialogue among all parties he or she helps to amplify resonances

and draw connections among all the artists” (Cole 202).

During this post mortem examination of this technique, I believe its merits, for me, would

have come with experience. With this production, I occupied many different capacities

that all have challenges with Naturalism. Combined, they allowed me to see that the

visual details most certainly affect the work in rehearsals. The director must be actively

engaging with all of these facts and elements. The process with the actors provided some

equally challenging scenarios.

When character development and analysis for these characters was completed, I

had a very specific idea about what drove each of them and, most importantly, that they

were all the hero of the story in their own mind. This guided the audition process.

Through two nights of auditions, the number of student actors who embodied each

character allowed me to double cast the show. This meant there were now two separate

casts to prepare; two separate student interpretations of the characters that allowed me to

explore more possibilities that I had not thought of at the beginning of this process. This

indecisiveness allowed me to build two different shows that placed the audience’s

empathy with two different characters. While Julie is typically, in our modern society,

seen as a bratty and naïve woman, she most certainly does not deserve her fate in the

show.

With this work, actors could relate to both the obvious traits of their characters,

and the traits that were less obvious. For example, Jean is a highly manipulative and

6

exploitive character that uses the two women in this show to get what he wants. The two

young men that played Jean did not possess these traits and struggled to get a deeper than

superficial understanding of Jean’s super objective. This is where the research on gender

communication theory served both casts. To encourage the young men to examine their

action verbs for each beat we began to look at the cycle of how Jean began to manipulate

Julie. Through his adoption of traditionally feminine speech patterns he not only disarms

Julie, but Christine as well. Jean begins to talk of his dreams shortly after Christine goes

to bed,

JEAN: No, my dream is that I am lying under a tall tree in a dark wood. I want to

get up, up to the top, so that I can look out over the smiling landscape, where the

sun is shining, and so that I can rob the nest in which lie the golden eggs (8).

Only a few lines previously Julie uses the exact language structure in repeating her words

throughout a phrase,

JULIE: … I have climbed to the top of a column and sit there without being able

to tell how to get down again. I get dizzy when I look down, and I must get down,

but I haven’t the courage to jump off. I cannot hold on, and I am longing to fall

and yet I don’t fall…(8)

Jean begins to admit intimate details to Julie, and the actors must then decide if he is

translating his message in a feminine speech pattern out of necessity or if he is using this

as a manipulative tool to access Julie at her core. Is he trying to get Julie to submit to him

through manipulating what she thinks she controls: The conversation? Julie feels a strong

kinship to her emotions and was taught to keep them guarded, especially from men. Jean

uses this “rapport talk” to encourage Julie (Galvin, et al. 24). Through the use of the

7

gendered communication study that is detailed in an addendum to this report, the actors

were able to relate to their characters on a level that allowed intimate character

relationships to form onstage. These intimate relationships exposed a personal trauma for

one of the young women playing Julie.

With this discovery, I could then explore how to work with this actress and her

personal trauma. She was unable to be touched in any way that triggered a past trauma in

her life. The question was then how we work with a cast that has a Julie who cannot be

touched? How do we work different builds and moments within the show without further

traumatizing the actress? I was fortunate to have an actress who wanted to work past her

trauma. Through our work with exploring gendered body language and language, she was

able to use the text and language to physically engage with Jean as Julie rather than as her

true self. When we approached any moments that proved to be physically challenging for

her, she found purpose through Julie’s atypically gendered behaviors. She could use the

language and Structuralist Standpoint Theory to interact with her fellow actors (Kroløkke

and Sørensen 172).

This experience was full of insightful conversations and lessons with colleagues,

mentors, professionals, and students. Through the employment of different practices

learned in my graduate studies, I was able to test things that may or may not work for my

process as a director. The use of gendered communication theory became an invaluable

tool in reaching the actors. The process of double casting the show with a mixture of

experience levels proved to be a challenge that afforded me the opportunity to appreciate

the sheer amount of time necessary to fully explore two different interpretations of the

same script at the same time. Finally, the use of Liberatory Pedagogy in this process was

8

a miss for me. I look forward to fine tuning its implementation more in future endeavors.

Its possibilities as a teaching tool are endless, and the ability to encourage a student

design collaborative is something I look forward to exploring in my future as an educator.

I have been humbled by this experience, and look forward to the next challenge to

implement all that I have learned through these characters and Strindberg’s Naturalist

ideology.

9

Works Cited

Cole, Jonathan. "Liberatory Pedagogy and Activated Directing: Restructuring the College

Rehearsal Room.” Theatre Topics 18.2 (2008): 191-204. Project MUSE. Web. 7

Jun. 2016.

Galvin, Sarah M., Martha R. Dolly, and Judith J. Pula. "Genderlect and Participation in

the College English Classroom." Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin 79.2 (2013): 22-

30. ProQuest. Web. 18 June 2016.

Kroløkke, Charlotte, and Ann Scott. Sørensen. Gender Communication Theories &

Analyses: From Silence to Performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,

2006. Print.

10

Appendix A. Production Photos

Production Rehearsal Photo © Jenava Harris

Production Rehearsal Photo © Jenava Harris

11

Production Photo © Jenava Harris

Production Photo © Jenava Harris

12

Appendix B. Director’s Analysis

Jenava Harris

Dr. Eshelman

TH 6893

6-24-16

MISS JULIE ANALYSIS

In Miss Julie August Strindberg raises many questions for us to consider. What is

the root of communication error between the sexes? How does the “degenerate woman”

find peace in her life? How do the lower classes advance their station in life? What

sacrifices of the soul have to be made in order to abolish cowardice? These questions and

more are at the ground level of an exploration into Strindberg’s narrative and its intent

with audiences.

This play is about abuse and identity, relationships, sex, and manipulation. Miss

Julie follows the story of three people that are seeking to eradicate an oppression they

face in their lives. Whether that oppression is classism, gender violence, or psychological

predispositions, Jean, Julie, and Christine seek a change in their lives. The problems arise

when this change they seek becomes dependent on the destruction of another. In our

society today we face endless amounts of violence that is often geared toward some

radical notion.

The rape culture surrounding college campuses is wrought with debate over what

kind of justice is appropriate for victims and perpetrators. Radical extremists that seek to

massacre people based on their sexual identity or religious ideologies fill new casts on a

13

much too frequent level. Through our exploration of the themes of this show we must

seek to involve study on several different cases to find a way to tell the story of both

victim and perpetrator. Through Jean and Julie’s encounters they are driven by a need to

reconcile the violent tendencies they have toward one another. They are both victim and

perpetrator at different points of the narrative. We must work to figure out why they

responded this way while also examining what justice means for each party. What is

justice for these two against their oppressor? How are they both liable for the damage

they inflict and the consequences that follow? What degree of cowardice brings them to

the moment of conflict with each other or with themselves? This is not meant to say that

victims in sexual or physical assault have a responsibility to their attacker or their role in

the attack but rather to examine how Jean and Julie are both assailants that verbally and

physically assault each other. Through that duality of assault we had to examine what this

says about how we encounter differing ideologies in our own lives. These characters all

have very different ways of thinking and the resulting conflict of those ideologies and

power dynamics provides a lesson in our tolerance of differing viewpoints.

I chose this play to explore not only its dark themes and their reflections on

humanity, but also to find a formula for working with young actors to facilitate an open

communication platform. The students of Arkansas Tech University have a use for

exploring the themes of cowardice and ineptitude as a weapon against others and the self.

Our current society necessitates the ability to decipher communication practices to

effectively and informatively deliver a message.

14

THEME:

The dangers of idealization.

While this play offers many different translations, this production and its director

intend to establish the theme of this show as an encouragement for the audience to

scrutinize the narrative in their own lives. It will serve as an anecdote of what can

happen when idealization dictates action. From this we can begin to examine how we

use idealization or ignorance in our own lives. Only upon self-actualization can we begin

to grow.

CLIMAX OF THE SHOW:

The climax of the show or the point of no return comes at the sexual encounter between

Jean and Julie. This is the point at which their idealization of each other and their

physiological responses are at their highest and lead to a situation both cannot recover

from no matter how they try throughout the rest of the show. Strindberg challenged

DelSarte’s well-made play formula and as such offers a long falling action and

denouement to rival the length of the first half of the show.

SUPEROBJECTIVE:

To kill any subordination and idealization

METAPHOR:

A cage fighting ring.

15

The intimacy of an impending battle within the confines of a cage fighting ring

reinforce the intimate and impending battle within the kitchen. It offers little chance for

escape especially once the gloves are fitted and ready. The battles and conflicts of

Naturalism, to Strindberg, relied on this excerpt from his collected essays,

“…this is the kind of misconceived Naturalism which believed that art

simply consisted in copying a piece of nature in a natural way, but not the greater

Naturalism which seeks out those points where the great battles take place, which

loves to see what one does not see every day, which delights in the struggles

between natural forces, whether those forces are called love and hate, the spirit of

revolt, or social instincts…”

GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES:

-Time:

Time of Composition: The play was written in 1888. The social climate in the

dramatic world was looking at a very significant reaction to the traditional dramas of the

age. Melodramatic plays were marked by a caricature of life when presented on stage.

This was met with some firm opposition by the work of a new movement called Realism.

This movement sought to explore the notion of dramatic literature as a representation of

the realistic aspects of life, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The work of the father of

Naturalism, Emile Zola, sought to explore the Darwinian teachings of the time and how

they fit into the new dramatic landscape in the plays of Ibsen, Chekov, and others along

with the new performance practices being taught by Stanislavski. Zola sought to build a

bridge between what he saw as an often idealistic view of thematic issues in some plays.

16

Naturalism sought to examine the scientific reasons behind why some people seem

predisposed to bad behaviors. Naturalism is characterized by the following:

-an attempt to determine the scientific forces influencing the actions of people.

-a desire to identify the social and psychological problems in ordinary life and the

Darwinian root of this. Darwinian Theory that lead this was based around the

notion that heredity and social environment determine one’s character.

-a character’s fate is often pre-ordained and any surprising plot twist is included

to parallel that often surprising quality in everyday life.

When Strindberg read of the teachings and theories of Zola and their applications

in dramatic literature he wrote Miss Julie, among others, to provide a story that examined

these theories with a full inclusion of the dark side of socioeconomic customs of the time.

As stated before, the feminist ideology Miss Julie learned from her mother pre-ordained

her to an ill fate. She adopted those same “hysterical” symptoms from her mother in a

Darwinian behavioral evolution. The instinctual aspects of this show drive home a

Darwinian survival of the fittest that ends with any indication of breaking subservient

roles as a sure death sentence.

Time of Action: The play takes place over the course of Midsummer Eve Festival.

This historically is also known as St. John’s Eve. The events of the show are directly

related to these outside forces creating the perfect atmosphere for this breakdown in

propriety. The holiday was celebrated to pay homage to St. John the Baptist who was

beheaded to squash any possible uprising he could incite against the reigning king of

Galilee. While Midsummer Eve is marked as a time to celebrate the health, fertility, and

17

virility of life, St. John’s Day was a day to celebrate the birth of John the Baptist that was

believed to have been six months prior to the birth of Jesus, just around the summer

solstice. Below are accounts of European (mostly Swedish) customs surrounding

Midsummer Eve Festival:

-fertility festival, celebrating the beginning of summer- summer solstice

-begins with the rising of Midsummer Eve pole (may-pole) that was covered in

flowers and danced around to symbolize fertility and new life.

-in Croatia and Denmark many times large bonfires were erected to either jump

over (Croatia) or to burn an effigy of a witch to keep evil spirits at bay.

-greenery was often placed over homes and barns to bring good fortune and health

to people and livestock.

These customs and beliefs are surrounding the action within the claustrophobic

kitchen Julie, Jean and Christine exist within. Strindberg’s setting of the action of the

play further supports the influence of outside forces on these characters. The festival puts

a decidedly informal veil over everyone’s behavior that then allows their dark desires to

take over in the subconscious interest of fulfilling the fertile mission of the holiday. This

allows Miss Julie to succumb to her instinctual need whilst “in heat” along with Jean’s

lust to take over.

This time in European and American culture also found the place of women as

subservient to men. Women were expected to build a happy home and family for her

husband. Classes were also not to be toyed with. If you were at a certain level of

aristocracy you were born into it. Jean had no hope of elevating his rank to a satisfying

level. The trouble comes when Strindberg puts a higher born woman with a lower born

18

male. The complexities of that power struggle are integral in displaying the Darwinian

survival of the fittest motif. Gender roles and societal constructs were essential in

understanding how these complexities lead to the play’s dark conclusion.

Dramatic Time: The action of the play takes place beginning in the late evening

hours of Midsummer Eve and conclude in the early morning hours of the next morning.

Approximate times: 10:00 PM - 8:00AM. This is based on research of the customary

practice of the servant class at this time. 10 PM would have been when all of the daily

chores were done ad when revelry would be in full swing for festival goers. The play

ends with Christine leaving for church and as such this would have started mid-morning

to allow everyone to get there after early morning chores.

-Place:

Geographical Locale: This play was set by the playwright in his native Sweden.

Many adaptations have changed this location. This director feels it necessary to reflect

important thematic elements by keeping the play in its native country with the class

system intact. Moving this to another country would compromise the playwright’s intent.

Specific Locale: The play occurs completely within the confines of Miss Julie’s

father’s (The Count) home. More specifically in the kitchen. Jean and Julie to leave the

stage for a brief period but return to confront the consequences of their actions within the

kitchen. Per Strindberg, the kitchen should feel claustrophobic as if this is the womb in

which these two characters create a very massive challenge to the subordination they

experience in their lives. Further attention will be paid to the actual hierarchy between

characters in a later section.

19

-Society:

Families: The three characters within have no familial ties to each other.

Love and Friendship: Jean and Christine are close enough to each other to have

an agreed upon engagement based on their relationship with each other. After Christine

infers what jean and Julie have done she formulates a plan that ends with his suicide so

that she, as his widow, and his children may have a pension to live off on her new plan

for their lives. Her line is, “Your plans, yes—but you’ve got obligations also, and those

you had better keep in mind.” This line indicates that she and Jean have obligations

between themselves that prove detrimental to her and her reputation.

Julie is seeking a real connection to someone on a level of protected equality. She

wants to find someone that she can trust to be vulnerable around despite what her mother

taught her. The teachings of her mother and the coldness of her father have made that

task all but impossible to accomplish as she does not have the emotional skills to be able

to handle that search properly. This quiet desperation within her leads to the ultimate

mistake of trusting Jean. She has had a broken engagement from a man she sought to

control and humiliate into submission to her but that all points to her physical and

emotional inability to act the way she “should” in love. She doesn’t know how to handle

these things properly and this naiveté contributes to her downfall.

Occupation, Social Status, and Social Standards: Julie is the daughter of a rich

count who is absent from the script aside from mentions by all three characters to his

wealth and status. As the daughter of a count she would have been expected to marry to

ensure her security and survival as she has no discernible skills that would make her

20

useful in any workforce suitable to her status in life. In search of meaningful connection,

she participates in the festivities of midsummer night with the servants of the house and

thus lowers herself. She was to go away with friends and her father to celebrate among

people of her station but her recent ended engagement provided a source of

embarrassment in facing those people. Her break from social custom in dancing with Jean

twice and other servant men is seen as even stranger by the servant class because of her

severe attitude to those people and her position as their superior.

The dynamics between Jean and Christine are even more interesting upon

research of actual manor house hierarchy of the time. Jean is the valet to Julie’s father,

the Count, and revels in his status as the closest servant to the master of the house.

Christine is the cook to the family and maintains a level of dignity in this position. In late

Victorian society, manor houses placed head cooks above any personal servant in the line

of importance with regards to the social hierarchy of the home. The hierarchy of upper

staff is listed below:

Butler Housekeeper Cook or Chef Lady’s Maid and

Valet

This further advances the class issues within the script as the man, the seemingly superior

person compared to these two women is actually lowest in class. Christine would have

been paid more than Jean (by a small margin). This extra layer of complexity in the story

allows the reader to see Strindberg’s vision and statement even clearer. The man tries to

break all subordination to his station in life and propriety on an instinctual level. Jean is

preordained to take this road as his low class has backed him into a corner in the triangle

of action with these two women.

21

-Economics- The play exists within a capitalist setting where the rich count has his

money and status and Jean and Christine work for wages but the gap is so wide between

the two that it makes it increasingly difficult for Jean and Christine to elevate their station

in life due to their meager savings. Jean desires to open up a hotel with Christine as the

mistress of the house and cook so that they can secure their own financial future that

allows them more creature comforts in life and the potential to build wealth and status.

The situation makes this goal much harder to entertain as Jean now has an obligation to

her and then decides to use her to steal the money from her father to finance his capital

intentions.

-Politics and Law: All characters operate within a specific class hierarchy (as detailed

earlier) within the home and scope of the play. They all seek to challenge it in some way.

-Spirituality: The play mentions many times the fact that Christine will be going to

church to hear the sermon on John the Baptist. The play adopts a decidedly Christian

attention to traditions and the consequences of breaking from those traditions.

-The World of the Play: All characters are driven by restlessness to challenge the social

norms and gender roles that have trapped them in an inescapable cycle of always

wondering what is on the other side of their oppression.

EXPOSITION:

22

Below are brief character studies on Julie’s father and mother to shed light on the

situations leading to this play.

The Count

Gender: Male. Julie’s father exhibits all the trappings of masculine gender roles.

While he does experience a great bit of turmoil at the hands of his wife, Julie’s

mother, he attempts to cunningly right her transgressions but she is step ahead of

him. This leads to his attempt and eventual failure at suicide. Strindberg’s

commentary on feminist ideology leaves him in a decidedly superior place as he

is the man who was wronged by a progressive woman. He gets his life back

together and then separates himself from all relationships that could lead to the

same end he almost met with Julie’s mother. This explains his absence in Julie’s

life and her propensity to challenge her place as a subordinate to men.

Class /Status: Count who manages a new enterprise most likely within an

industrial setting as he has to travel for work and the spread of industrialism

would have afforded opportunity to build a new business.

Physical Description: I think that the Count is similar in build and size to Jean.

While Jean has the advantage of youth, the count could still be seen as a man who

is fit for his age. He is not nearly as virile in appearance as Jean at his age but in

his prime he would have been. This would enhance the gravity of his fall from

grace.

Morality: By modern definitions, the Count does seem to exhibit loose morals.

With his dealings with his wife, he was led down a path that built his propensity

for revenge or spitefulness. However, in the world of the Victorian era space they

23

occupy, he has bestowed on Julie and his servants a sense that he has a high moral

compass. Julie, Jean, and Christine are all collectively convinced of his inability

to handle what occurred between Jean and Julie. He would not be able to handle

the shame. He runs a tight ship and expects his servants to abide by the duty and

responsibility to the status he rebuilt for himself.

Julie’s Mother

Gender- Female with massive tendencies toward masculine gender role

identification. Her inability to stay in her place as a subservient woman to her

husband and her desire to challenge her place in life, points toward a decidedly

less emotional drive. She operates in her desire to bend everyone to her will and

way of thinking, a much more masculine character trait, especially at this time in

history.

Age (at death): 33

Class / Status: She was woman who would have been expected to work in and

around running the home or supervising the servants who did so. She came from a

lower class family than the count and as such would have been treated as even

more inferior to him at the onset of the relationship. Her lower social status

contributed to her feminist ideology that she imparted on Julie. As a mode of

survival, she developed manipulative tendencies to give her an edge on perceived

oppression.

Physical Description: Beautiful, this led to her marriage to the Count despite the

inferiority of her social status.

24

Morality: Based on the dealings with her husband it can be said that she had a

very loose moral compass guiding her actions. She cheated on him and swindled

money away to her lover so he could never reach it.

CHARACTER:

Julie:

Super Objective: Julie’s super objective throughout the play is to identify and then

abolish any trace of cowardice within herself.

Major Quality: Forcefully

Conflict: Julie’ overriding conflict to those around her comes in both internal and

external forms. Her major internal struggle stems from her inability to reconcile her

desire for intimate, emotional human contact with someone who will encourage the best

parts of herself against the hereditary implications of her mother’s ideologies and

influence. Her external conflict exists in her perceived weakness through being a woman.

Strength of Will: Julie’s strength of will seems to undergo a transition throughout

the show. She begins very powerful and forceful and ends the epitome of weakness. This

is the very thing that indicates her weak will. She allows herself to be manipulated to

reach a seeming happiness and then submits herself to his desire when she thinks she can

no longer control a favorable outcome.

Values: Julie desires a world in which she maintains all benefits of her social

status but also desires to exert control on all people he meets and interacts with to satisfy

her feminist ideology. She believes whole heartedly in the caste system in place and

believes herself to be superior to all the servants in her home not just by right of birth but

also by her arrogant superiority of privilege.

25

Jean:

Super Objective: Jean’s super objective throughout the show is to cunningly

manipulate conflicts to serve his best interest, whether that is his desire to elevate rank or

his desire to avoid the possibility of the situation with Julie all together. His actions are

constantly guided by intent to secure a gain for himself or his sense of security. He is

driven by his idealization of an elevation in rank and status.

Major Quality: Calculating

Conflict: Jean’s major source of conflict is the inferiority of his station and his

position at the bottom of the social hierarchy compared to Julie and Christine. Through

the events of the play he is presented with the problem of influencing the other characters

through his perceived superiority as a man. He uses the “man card” to his advantage in

putting both Julie and Christine in a place he can control. Julie represents a possibility to

rise up but only through shame and force. Christine is the safe bet that can help him work

toward the dream on the horizon but she also has a strict moral compass that Jean cannot

manipulate. His main external conflict exists in the now imminent probability of having a

child with Julie and the ensuing responsibility both to Julie and Christine based on his

extra marital liaisons.

Strength of Will: Jean’s will is strong throughout the play until the absolute end.

He demonstrates control in all things throughout but loses that control twice in the show.

The first time is during the sexual encounter with Julie as detailed earlier in this analysis

and ultimately when he hears the count ring his bell for service. When Jean hears that bell

he follows through on his control of Julie if only to ensure his own survival, but

26

ultimately loses his self-determination to flee and returns to his subordination and duty to

the count.

Values: Jean’s values center on a strong desire to make a better life for himself in

spite of his upbringing and position in life. He believes in respecting the class system but

also desires a way to rise up within it to attain the same status as the count one day. This

belief in and struggle against the class barriers drives him to reach his goals by any means

necessary.

Christine:

Super Objective: Christine’s super objective throughout is to continue her same

routine and reach a level of security to make her plans with Jean feasible. She wants to

have a life with Jean and understands the restrictions of her social status that also provide

opportunities. She is the cook of the home which is one of the highest class positions

within that comes complete with a level of respect and propriety that she has no interest

in sacrificing. If she loses ground, that is longer for her to work to attain it again.

Major Quality: Morally grounded

Conflict: The major internal conflict Christine faces is how to reconcile what Jean

has done with Julie against her feelings for him and how it may sacrifice the plans she

has for her future. Her external conflict lies within her inability to compete with either

Jeans physical prowess and virility and Julie’s beauty and grace. She is lowest in terms of

physical attraction and thus has to rely on her strict moral center to attain respect and

further her position in life.

Strength of Will: Christine has a strong willpower throughout the show, she never

fully wavers from her position and chastises the other two characters for their

27

transgressions. When she find out what Jean did she formulates how to best handle that

situation by planning out their next steps all the way down to his eventual suicide that

will ensure her survival.

Values: Christine has a very strong moral compass that guides all of her

endeavors. She is religious and makes it an important point to note that had Jean and Julie

kept their morals in mind or religious teachings, they would not have done what they did.

She places strict importance on respect for those above her in social class as long as they

behave in a way that warrants her esteemed respect. Christine has a high opinion of

herself and in her mind this is a humble high regard. She does however plot out strategic

moves to ensure her survival, no matter the consequence to everyone else as they have

dropped to level that no longer demands or deserves her respect.

TEMPO:

The tempo of every part of this show falls to musical references to indicate the severity of

responses along with the mania Jean and Julie both experience at some point with in the

show. This director has experience with indicating and conducting these musical tempos.

Table work will include work with actors to identify the tempo in music with major shifts

in their characters dynamics.

MOOD:

Throughout the production, design team members must pay attention to the style of the

show. This production will be conducted in the traditional Naturalist style staying true to

the playwright’s intentions on the given circumstances. This encourages the designers to

28

pay attention to the dark mood of the show. Survival of the fittest is important to note as

are the given circumstances discussed earlier. The play is set at night or Midsummer Eve,

these indicate a strong pull to the dark desires in people and giving them a chance to

either enhance or destroy traditional values.

29

Appendix C. Director’s Program Note

Miss Julie is a work that has followed me throughout my career as a theatre

professional. I was introduced to the battles of this story as an under graduate and

Strindberg’s masterpiece has stayed with me as a testament to the power that

psychological torment can inflict upon another human being. When I began to approach

what play I would like to explore and direct for my Master’s thesis project I immediately

thought of this work. For so long I have been an artist driven by the need to explore

major themes that are relevant to our society in its current state. The use of theatre as a

medium to show how we as humans can discover prejudices about ourselves that we were

not aware of opens up the possibilities for self-reflection. This reflection can often take us

to a place that changes how we see and respond to the world around us. That magic and

power in the theatre and the responsibility I have as the artist delivering that message

truly empower not only myself but all of the students I have the opportunity to work with.

Through their dedication and work on this script we have all learned valuable lessons

from each other not only on our process but also about how we respond to the world

around us.

Miss Julie follows the story of three people that are seeking to eradicate an

oppression they face in their lives. Whether that oppression is classism, gender violence,

or psychological predispositions, Jean, Julie, and Christine seek a change in their lives.

The problems arise when this change they seek becomes dependent on the destruction of

another. In our society today we face endless amounts of violence that is often geared

toward some radical notion. The rape culture surrounding college campuses is wrought

with debate over what kind of justice is appropriate for victims and perpetrators. Radical

30

extremists that seek to massacre people based on their sexual identity or religious

ideologies fill new casts on a much too frequent level. Through our exploration of the

themes of this show we involved study on several different cases to find a way to tell the

story of both victim and perpetrator. Through Jean and Julie’s encounters they are driven

by a need to reconcile the violent tendencies they have toward one another. They are both

victim and perpetrator at different points of the narrative. We sought to figure out why

they responded this way while also examining what justice means for each party. What is

justice for these two against their oppressor? How are they both liable for the damage

they inflict and the consequences that follow? This was not meant to say that victims in

sexual or physical assault have a responsibility to their attacker or their role in the attack

but rather to examine how Jean and Julie are both assailants that verbally and physically

assault each other. Through that duality of assault we had to examine what this says about

how we encounter differing ideologies in our own lives. These characters all have very

different ways of thinking and the resulting conflict of those ideologies and power

dynamics provides a lesson in our tolerance of differing viewpoints.

The stage gave our team a way to explore how the delicate struggle between all

three of these characters relates to how we approach our own biases. There are plenty of

different mediums that offer a biased framework for storytelling but this production

sought to encourage the audience to see that although we may be different, violence and

assault against those ideas and principles is never justified. I sincerely hope this

production opens a dialogue on who the victimized party is throughout this storyline. The

answer can be quite subjective and I encourage you to communicate with each other

31

about this. Through that open exploration of differing ideas we can begin to more

thoroughly understand the world around us.

32

Appendix D. K/ACTF Respondent Notes

33

34

Appendix E. Student Response Papers

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Appendix F. “Genderlect as Character Study: Gender Communication Theory

and Miss Julie”

Jenava Harris

Dr. Eshelman

TH 6893

6-27-16

Genderlect as Character Study: Gender Communication Theory and Miss Julie

Naturalist ideology relies on one overarching principle, that scientific reasoning

and forces guide the natural world. Supernatural ideologies are not considered as the

main governing body of the world is benefitted by an examination of the scientific forces

at play. The dramatic vein of the Naturalist movement saw many deep and provocative

works during its time. Throughout the naturalist movement many works were composed

that sought to build upon the ideas of Realism in the works of Ibsen and Chekov. August

Strindberg is arguably one of the foremost studies in naturalist literature. His play Miss

Julie most specifically sought to explore the contrast of idealization and degradation of

people and ideologies. The characters within all offer a wealth of complexity that is often

subjective in its interpretation. When approaching Miss Julie for performance there are so

many opportunities to be explored in how we work with young actors to identify with the

complex violence within the show. The use of sociological and psychological theories

has been employed in character exploration for many years. Through Miss Julie there is

an opportunity that has not been tapped when approaching character analysis of Jean,

Julie, and Christine. Gender Communication Theory offers an intensive addition to a

character analysis workbook. Through this lens of analysis and discovery on these

48

characters, actors can intensify their ability to work and identify on a new level of

intricacy. Through the exploration and implementation of gendered communication

studies we can supplement the techniques of reputable acting theorists to create the world

of Miss Julie as one enriched with specificity and truth for our actors.

The themes of Strindberg’s Miss Julie offer a catalyst for exploration of the world

around. When approaching the direction of a show it important to wholly immerse

oneself into the world of the play. The playwright has created a narrative ripe with

possibilities to demonstrate human nature; the good, the bad, and the oftentimes very

ugly. When exploring the dark themes inherent in Miss Julie, it is imperative to pay

attention to the nuances Strindberg leaves behind. They are the trail of bread crumbs that

leads to a full and immersive look at human capacity for idealization and manipulation.

Through his exploration of naturalist ideologies Strindberg sought to use the

realistic setting to explore psychological and physiological wants and needs. Essentially,

how do humans on a visceral level add depth to the world around us? How does

exploration of these themes affect our response to the world around us? The complexities

arise from Strindberg’s desire to manipulate the seemingly mundane to offer the audience

a place to form their own ideas about what they cannot necessarily see. In his foreword to

the play he describes, “I have borrowed from impressionist painting the device of making

a setting appear cut off and asymmetrical, thus strengthening the illusion. When we only

see part of a room…, we are left to conjecture…, our imagination goes to work and

compliments what is seen” (Strindberg 10). Strindberg manipulation parallels the

manipulation of his characters and their idealization of the world around them.

49

The thematic element that stands out again and again is the danger of idealizing

what we do not have. The use of a kitchen setting parallels the presence of these themes

in our everyday lives. Everyday human interaction requires a transmission and receiving

of messages, wants, and needs. The characters in this play Julie, Jean, and Christine all

have specifics desires in their lives and Strindberg’s establishes these three characters as

covetous at their core. They all idealize something about one another and the addition of

watching that idealization lead to degradation sets the stage for an inevitable tragic end.

Strindberg’s protagonist embodies an intense dissatisfaction with life and the

resulting manic state of behavior that follows a desperation for escape. Julie is a woman

that is ahead of her time in her feminist ideology but she lacks the ability to use that

ideology for anything other than oppression. She relies on that ideology to guide her into

a place of guarded acceptance into some sort of connection with a person that can match

her. She wants to belong to something that she hasn’t yet found in the detachment of her

parents and the guarded manner around her friends. Through Julie’s oppressive attitude

toward men she has driven off her fiancé that would have been a ticket out of her father’s

home. She attempted to degrade him to a point that she could assume total power and

control over him. Her mother taught her to never allow a man to hold all the cards in his

hand, she has to have deceptions of her own in order to maintain some level of control on

her own situation. To Strindberg this was indicative of a “weak and degenerate brain” as

described in his foreword to the play (Strindberg 2). Julie was unable to perform and exist

in her society because of a glitch in how her brain processed being a woman. Whether

through nature or nurture, depending on which Darwinian side you chose to take, Julie

was a woman that had the feminist ideologies of her mother along with the empathy for

50

her father that made her unable to be fully manipulative like or her mother or fully

subordinate as a woman ought to have been in the Victorian Era. Not until the feminist

movement of the mid-20th century would there be published and studied theory on how

women communicate in a patriarchal hierarchy.

The latter half of the 20th century saw a rise in publications about how we classify

not only gender itself but how the men and women communicated with themselves and

each other. Structuralist Theory brought about definition on two different ideas about

how women develop communication patterns in a patriarchal society. The two theories

were Muted Group Theory and Standpoint Theory. Muted group theory relied on the idea

that men dominated the linguistic and communication style and that women were thereby

forced to adapt. In order for women to communicate it was necessary to adopt masculine

communication styles or translate their message. This meant that women were muted, but

not silenced. Even without this translation, women still found ways to communicate but

the gap of understanding between the sexes seemed to be deepening. Standpoint Theory

offered the idea that based on the status of being a woman, women were of a different

viewpoint than men. This different viewpoint allowed them to reinforce and strengthen

the more feminine communication patterns as they were just as worthwhile even if they

were different. Women and scholars were led to reevaluate certain communication

formats such as gossip (Kroløkke and Sørensen 172). These two theories offered an idea

about why women and men adapt to and sometimes adopt certain communication styles

and dialect patterns.

In her work on analyzing the gendered communication processes of men and

women, Deborah Tannen coined a term that begins to describe the different syntax and

51

diction choices between the sexes. Genderlect refers to the specific vocabulary usage

between the sexes that ultimately forms a sort of dialect unique to a gender or gender

identification. Women have certain ways of speaking or structuring communicatin and

men do as well. In the article “Genderlect and Participation in the College Classroom,”

Sarah Galvin, Martha Dolly, and Judith Pula quote Tannen to illustrate the differences in

male and female communication patterns and why they begin. Tannen asserts,

“Typically, a girl has a best friend with whom she sits and talks, frequently telling

secrets…For boys, activities are central…[they] tend to play in larger groups, that are

hierarchal…[and] use language to seize center stage” (Galvin, Dolly, Pula 24). This

pattern is seen in many different formats throughout television, theatre, movies, and real

life. Tannen also asserts that this genderlect serves two different functions for both sexes.

Her ides of “rapport talk” versus “report talk” focus on a female desire for

connection versus a male desire to command attention and deliver information. These

two functions shed much more light on how men and women use, exploit, and manipulate

communication patterns for their own gain. The situation between Strindberg’s characters

and their inability to understand and communicate effectively leads the plot through a

series of events that illustrate Tannen’s theory. Through that inability all parties choose

manipulation to translate their message to each other. That manipulation guides them

toward destruction.

Jean is Strindberg’s master of communication manipulation in the narrative.

When analyzing the character of Jean his psyche begins at a place of trying to find the

greener pasture that he desires. He wants to elevate his rank and social status and he takes

advantage of every situation that will get him there. While he does try to avoid Julie’s

52

advances, he ultimately realizes that she could be a viable option in moving past his

current situation. His behavior seems manic throughout the major plot turns of the

narrative. However, when analyzed through the lens of genderlect manipulation, Jean’s

calculating movements are overtly malicious.

The opening of the play centers around his delicate flirtation with Christine that

underscores their conversation about the radical Miss Julie. When Julie enters the action

both Christine and Jean are careful to remember their place as her subordinate while also

trying to hide their horror at her lack of propriety. Julie imposes her will upon them and

once Jean and Julie are alone the dialogue begins to shift. When Jean admits to Julie that

he knows Christine snores in her sleep, he opens a door to intimate conversation and

communication that would not be the norm. He vacillates back and forth between

intimate admissions and indignant reminders of her to remember her place as a lady.

Then Jean begins to talk of his dreams shortly after Christine goes to bed,

JEAN: No, my dream is that I am lying under a tall tree in a dark wood. I want to

get up, up to the top, so that I can look out over the smiling landscape, where the

sun is shining, and so that I can rob the nest in which lie the golden eggs (8).

Jean’s admission of his dream alludes to his desire to rise above his current position and

foreshadows the eventual loss of Julie’s virtue, but it begins a process for him. This

process is Jean beginning to adopt feminine communication patterns centered around

sharing each other’s confidence. He begins to admit intimate details to her and the reader

must then decide if he is translating his message in a feminine speech pattern out of

necessity or if he is using this as a manipulative tool to access Julie at her core. Is he

trying to get Julie to submit to him through manipulating what she thinks she controls, the

53

conversation? Julie feels a strong kinship to her emotions and was taught to keep them

guarded, especially from men. Jean uses this rapport talk to encourage Julie. This

continuation of their open communication ultimately leads to Julie betraying herself in

the most unforgiving way.

Strindberg’s Julie is built upon the teachings and examples of her mother and

father. Deborah Tannen’s theories in her book That’s Not What I Meant discuss the

notion of nature versus nurture as mentioned earlier. Tannen says, boys and girls “grow

up in different worlds, even if they grow up in the same house. And as adults they travel

in different worlds, reinforcing patterns established in childhood” (Tannen 125). Julie is

the epitome of this assertion. Strindberg tried to articulate this in a rather antiquated way.

He writes in his character descriptions in the foreword, “Miss Julie is a modern character,

not because the man-hating half-woman may not have existed in all ages, but because

now, after her discovery, she has stepped to the front and begun to make a noise”

(Strindberg 6). Julie is a continuation of the teachings of her mother and father.

Strindberg thought this to be indication of her degenerate quality but on closer inspection

this is the very thing that establishes her as a tragic example of being ahead of her time.

Strindberg also writes, “My souls are conglomerates, made up of past and present stages

of civilization, scraps of humanity, torn off pieces of Sunday clothing turned into rags-all

patched together as is the human soul itself” (Strindberg 6). His piecing these characters

together is what decides their longevity. Essentially, Strindberg’s antiquated misogyny

meant to create Julie as a character whose fate was the result of bad breeding. In actuality

the manipulation of his other characters exploits Julie’s ignorance to her ideologies and

encourages her to believe that her subordination to gender roles is how things ought to be.

54

Julie would have benefitted from a healthy understanding of how to pair her personality

to her communication style in an effective way. Later studies in genderlect and gender

communication allow Miss Julie to be a study of the dangers of ill-communication and

the exploitation or manipulation once the styles are understood by one sex or the other.

So how do these parallels lend themselves to the performance space? How can

actors best explore these themes? Does genderlect and communication theory lend itself

to being part of the acting experience? These theories represent an ability to exercise

complex understanding of these characters. Once the characters are understood and

dialogue becomes verbal and defined by action, these gender theories offer ample room

for actors to find specificity in their character portrayals.

Acting technique has a long and well-studied past. The teachings of modern

performance technique by Constantin Stanislavski have morphed into many different

variations that pull form different emotional response centers to encourage actors to

connect to the character. Through that connection they are better able to understand and

then step into the world of the character. When examining characters as complex as Jean

and Julie or even Walter Lee and his Mama in A Raisin in the Sun the characters all need

or want something from the other. When actors begin to dissect the action of a particular

unit or beat these character relationships and cause and effect relationships are central to

driving the plot forward. Julie seeks connection, Jean presents, Julie employs oppressive

tactics to gain said connection. Those oppressive tactics are based around her use of

masculine communication strategies to command the attention of the room. Jean wants

Julie to back off, Julie will not, Jean sees opportunity, John seizes said opportunity. He

relates to her and finishes the work of bringing them to the same level through feminine

55

communication strategy to encourage her to let her guard down. The possibilities for

employing these gender studies to acting theory allow another facet of research for the

actor and another opportunity for truth onstage. That truth is what is so important in the

teachings of Stella Adler, Sanford Meisner, and others. The exploration of genderlect and

communication theories allows a new skill set to actors that seek to reach a new level of

identity in their characters.

The themes of Miss Julie are universal to understanding how communication can

break down. When communication does break down there are ways to rehabilitate

misunderstandings but more importantly there are ways to manipulate. Manipulation of

communication tactics allows characters to drive their plot forward and allows actors to

examine the character relationships and super objectives with a new eye. Strindberg’s

Miss Julie relies on the struggle of the two sexes to understand each other. Strindberg

never wanted them to as this leads to the tragic end of the show. This allows his show to

let audiences use their imaginations to fill in gaps as it suits their needs and deepens their

understanding. However, reading and performing this show with a new eye to the gender

issues and communication issues allows the evils of idealization to become a wide net

over the entire play. Idealization of Julie, of Jean, of elevated status, of the count, of

connection; all of these are based around how these characters communicate with

themselves and each other. In working with a new production of this show, these gender

communication theories could offer not only a way to understand the characters around

you but also the people in everyday life.

56

Works Cited

Galvin, Sarah M., Martha R. Dolly, and Judith J. Pula. "Genderlect and Participation in

the College English Classroom." Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin 79.2 (2013): 22-

30. ProQuest. Web. 18 June 2016.

Kroløkke, Charlotte, and Ann Scott. Sørensen. Gender Communication Theories &

Analyses: From Silence to Performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,

2006. Print.

Strindberg, August. "Author's Preface." Preface. Miss Julie. San Francisco, CA: Chandler

Pub., 1961. N. pag. Print.

Tannen, Deborah. That's Not What I Meant!: How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks

Your Relations with Others. New York: Morrow, 1986. Print.